The virtual interview format for fellowship recruitment in obstetrics and gynecology: a nationwide survey of program directors

Figures & data

Figure 1. Likert survey for fellowship program directors.

Table 1. Fellowship program director free text response questions themes and selected quotes

Identified Theme	Selected quotes
What did you like best about the virtual interview process?
Efficiency	‘It ran on time–because the breakout rooms made you finish on time’ ‘Quick, group format, easier. Achieved the same goals with less headache.’ ‘Ease of flowing from one interviewee to the next, without waiting for them to move from room to room’
Cost-savings for applicants	‘I prefer in-person, but I appreciate the financial benefit to applicants’ ‘The applicants saving of money and time’ ‘The applicant’s financial benefits: For that reason alone, I would support virtual interviews despite possible limitations in assessment of the candidates.’
Reaching more applicants	‘The ability to interview candidates from other states that would probably not have interviewed due to cost.’ ‘Greater acceptance of interview invitations.’ ‘We expanded our applicant pool because, with in person interviews, applicants on the west coast would have to take 3 days off to come interview. With virtual interviews, we can interview any candidate.’ ‘It allowed all applicants an even playing field for interviewing. They were not restrained by financial or COVID quarantines. Also due to lack of traveling may have accepted more interviews because they were able to attend.’
Convenience	‘It seemed easier to make arrangements. All the applicants looked rested.’ ‘It was easy for applicants. I didn’t find it a barrier to assess the applicants.’ ‘Faculty able to interview at any location/site during their day.’ ‘Less disruptive. Did not have interviews on Saturday, which faculty loved.’ ‘More convenient for applicants. Faculty who wanted to participate in the interview despite being on vacation were able to participate remotely. Ability to interact with candidates was better than expected.’
What was most challenging about the virtual interview process?
Inability to assess interpersonal skills	‘Feeling confident that we can assess candidates remotely as well as in person’ ‘The “down time” more casual chatting was eliminated – I’m not sure I had quite as good of a feel for personality.’ ‘Inability to see applicants during the less formal parts of interviews (socializing, interactions with staff and with each other). That is certainly missing from virtual and is important in assessing a person.’ ‘Unable to assess body language and interaction with other people in a group’ ‘Interaction with other applicants, non-physicians, body language are also import clues to character especially when looking for good fit’ ‘Less opportunity to interact informally at dinner and no one-on-one interaction with current fellows in between interviews to get fellow feedback on communication and personality’ ‘Not having the get together the night before prevented me from seeing their natural interaction in a group.’ ‘IT (Informational Technology) is fatiguing. I like a group social interaction, that was not as easy virtually. The candidates did not get the feel of the local area, the lab facilities, the restaurant scene without a visit’ ‘Getting a sense for how they interact in a group and with staff’ ‘Fellows usually have lunch with candidates and have a chance to meet them and speak informally. We tried to do it virtually, but it doesn’t work as well for casual conversation’
Not able to showcase facility	‘Convincing them that they would like to live in a city/state they have never seen’ ‘Not able to showcase our campus and facilities as well as we would have done with in-person interviews.’ ‘Cannot get a feeling of the person and the person cannot get a feeling of the city or program’ ‘Trying to convey the spirit of the program to applicants.’ ‘I am not sure they were able to experience our true culture and our program’
Inability to gauge the applicant’s interest	‘Unable to gauge how serious they were about us’ ‘Ability of any candidate to apply to every program without worrying about travel/cost/time’
Adjusting to new format	‘Learning the best way to do the interviews, etc. But once learned, it went great and can’t imagine going back.’ ‘Sitting in front of a computer screen for prolonged periods is a challenge.’ ‘It was somewhat awkward at times. It was more exhausting to interview via Zoom for half a day than in person. Although we had a happy hour, it was not the same as happy hours we have in person.’ ‘Zoom Fatigue!’

Figure 2. Likert survey for residency program directors (*Answered only by program directors who had residents applying for a fellowship during the 2020–2021 virtual match. (N = 52).

Table

	Strongly Agree					Agree					Disagree					Strongly Disagree
	REI N (%)	MFM	GYN ONC	FPMRS	Total	REI	MFM	GYN ONC	FPMRS	Total	REI	MFM	GYN ONC	FPMRS	Total	REI	MFM	ONC	FPMRS	Total
I was confidently able to assess the applicant’s interpersonal skills using a virtual interview platform	2 (18.2)	10 (27.0)	4 (28.6)	11 (84.6)	27 (36.0)	7 (63.6)	24 (64.9)	8 (57.1)	2 (15.4%)	41 (54.7)	2 (18.2)	3 (8.1)	2 (14.3)	0	7 9.3	0	0	0	0	0
I was confidently able to assess the applicant’s professionalism using a virtual interview platform	1 (9.1)	10 (27.0)	3 (21.4)	9 (69.2)	23 (30.7)	6 (54.5)	25 (67.6)	8 (57.1)	4 (30.8)	43 (57.3)	4 (36.4)	2 (5.4)	3 (21.4)	0	9 (12.0)	0	0	0	0	0
I was confidently able to assess the applicant’s problem-solving skills using a virtual interview platform	1 (9.1)	8 (21.6)	0	6 (46.20	15 (20.0)	8 (72.7)	23 (62.2)	9 (64.3)	7 (53.8)	47 (62.7)	1 (9.1)	6 (16.2)	5 (35.7)	0	12 (16.0)	1 (9.1)	0	0	0	0
I was confidently able to assess the applicant’s work ethic using a virtual interview platform	1 (9.1%)	5 (13.5)	1 (7.1)	2 (15.4)	9 (12.0)	4 (36.4)	23 (62.2)	6 (42.9)	10 (76.9)	43 (57.3)	6 (54.5)	9 (24.3)	7 (50.0)	1 (7.7)	23 (30.7)	0	0	0	0	0
I was confidently able to assess the applicant’s dedication to the subspecialty using a virtual interview platform	2 (18.2)	9 (24.3)	3 (21.4)	10 (76.9)	24 (32.0)	8 (72.7)	26 (70.3)	11 (78.6)	3 (23.1)	48 (64.0)	1 (9.1)	2 (5.4)	0	0	3 (4.0)	0	0	0	0	0
I was confidently able to assess the applicant’s research competency using a virtual interview platform	2 (18.2)	12 (32.4)	2 (14.3)	10 (76.9)	26 (34.7)	7 (63.6)	24 (64.9)	12 (85.7)	3 (23.1)	46 (61.3)	1 (9.1)	1 (2.7)	0	0	2 (2.7)	0	0	0	0	1 (1.3)
I was confidently able to assess the applicant’s fit for my program using a virtual interview platform	1 (9.1)	7 (18.9)	1 (7.1)	6 (46.2)	15 (20.0)	6 (54.5	28 (75.7)	9 (64.3)	7 (53.8)	50 (66.7)	4 (36.4)	2 (5.4)	4 (28.6)	0	10 (13.3)	0	0	0	0	0
I was confidently able to rank applicants using a virtual interview platform	1 (9.1)	12 (32.4)	2 (14.3)	8 (61.5)	23 (30.7)	7 (63.6)	23 (62.2)	10 (71.4)	5 (38.5)	45 (60.0)	3 (27.3)	2 (5.4)	2 (14.3)	0	7 (9.3)	0	0	0	0	0
I feel just as confident in ranking of applicants using a virtual platform as with traditional face-to-face interviews.	0	10 (27.0)	1 (7.1)	8 (61.5)	19 (25.3)	4 (36.4)	22 59.5	5 (35.7)	5 (38.5)	36 (48.0)	4 (36.4)	5 (13.5)	8 (57.1)	0	17 (22.7)	3 (27.3)	0	0	0	3 (4.0)
Under usual circumstances, I would choose to participate in in virtual fellowship interviews in the future.	1 (9.1)	9 (24.3)	3 (21.4)	3 (23.1)	16 (21.3)	4 (36.4)	21 (56.8)	6 (42.9)	7 (53.8)	38 (50.7)	3 (27.3)	7 (18.9)	3 (21.4)	3 (23.1)	16 (21.3)	3 (27.3)	0	2 (14.3)	0	5 (6.7)
I was accurately able to represent my program using a virtual interview platform.	1 (9.1)	7 (19.4)	3 (21.4)	5 (38.5)	16 (21.3)	4 (36.4)	22 (61.1)	6 (42.9)	7 (53.8)	39 (52.0)	6 (54.5)	7 (19.4)	5 (35.7)	1 (7.7)	19 (25.3)	0	0	0	0	0
Financial considerations of virtual interviews are less costly than face-to-face interviews.	10 (90.9)	30 (81.1)	11 (78.6)	13 (100.0)	64(85.3)	1 (91.)	7 (18.9)	3 (21.4)	0	11 (14.7)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I would prefer virtual interviews due to financial considerations.	2 (18.2)	12 (32.4)	4 (28.6)	5 (38.5)	23 (30.7)	3 (27.3)	15 (40.5)	5 (35.7)	6 (46.2)	29 (38.7)	3 (27.3)	10 (27.0)	5 (35.7)	2 (15.4)	20 (26.7)	3 (27.3)	0	0	0	3 (4.0)